This website uses features which update page content based on user actions. If you are using assistive technology to view web content, please ensure your settings allow for the page content to update after initial load (this is sometimes called "forms mode").
Additionally, if you are using assistive technology and would like to be notified of items via alert boxes, please follow this link to enable alert boxes for your profile.

This website uses features which update page content based on user actions. If you are using assistive technology to view web content, please ensure your settings allow for the page content to update after initial load (this is sometimes called "forms mode").
Alert box notification is currently enabled, please follow this link to disable alert boxes for your profile.

Senior Executive Service Facts & Figures

Report on Senior Executive Service Pay for Performance for Fiscal Year 2005

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This report reflects data on 6,834 career and non-career members of the Senior Executive Service. Of 6,410 rated, 5,906 are career members of the SES.

Agencies continue to make steady progress in the second year of measuring executive achievement under modernized performance management systems. Chart 1 shows progress in the differentiation of pay among SES members since 2004 when agencies with certified SES appraisal systems were permitted to pay SES above Executive Schedule Level III.

The first two tables show a decrease of 16 - 17 percent in those rated at the highest level, continuing a trend toward increased distinctions in ratings. Table 1 covers only career senior executives, while Table 2 includes non-career and limited term senior executives.

Agencies are exercising more rigor in implementing pay for performance. Table 3 shows that all reporting agencies now use appraisal systems with at least one level above fully successful. It also demonstrates that SES compensation is performance sensitive since, on average, higher-rated executives received higher performance awards and salary adjustments.

The shift to pay for performance involves only modest increases in award amounts. Table 5 shows the average performance award increased from $13,734 in FY 2004 to $13,814 in FY 2005. Awards vary by agency based on factors such as compensation strategy, funding, and agency performance levels.

1. Additional performance adjustment decisions were pending at the time of this report; data shown reflect MPR (maintain position in range) adjustments only.2. Agency appraisal system was not certified by OPM for CY2004 or CY2005.3. 2004 data for the Department of Homeland Security were not available for inclusion.4. 2005 non-career adjustment data for the Department of State were not available when this report was prepared.